Dubs, you sound like you’re looking for any reason not to vote for Obama. You still didn’t say what your expectations were and how you expected Obama to lead the government to meet them.

The country nearly went off an economic cliff and you’re complaining Obama didn’t give you ice cream and lollypops instead of stopping the damage. Sometimes just stopping problems from getting worse is work, but your unstated yet crybaby expectation is he didn’t do enough to. . . what? give you ice cream and lollypops?

Typical election year bellyaching - to get in power the opposition says:
1. The party in power didn’t do enough to make your life better
2. The party in power is stopping you from making your life better.
3. The party in power did too much to make your life better.

And all at the same time. Instead of saying how much Obama sucks how about saying how much better Romney and the Republicans, who got us into the mess, are going to fix it?

You’re committing several logical fallacies including: creating a “straw man argument” (attempting to counter a position by attacking a different one) and “moving the goal post” (setting the range of proof for acceptance beyond what can be provided, at least beyond what can be provided within the context of a paragraph or two in a post).

If you need a definition of leadership, there are some good books available out there. Whether you agree with Obama’s policies or not, he has not been a good leader. Bill Clinton was an effective president because he could lead, and he could convince people to follow him even if they did not want to. There is evidence in Romney’s record of personal, political, and economic successes that show he knows how to lead.

Obama may be smart enough to figure out some good policies (at least to figure out some good speeches) but he does not know how to lead to get those policies implemented. Even his signature accomplishments, the Affordable Care Act and the Stimulus Package, were all Nancy Pelosi and other democrats.

And your logical fallacy is to conclude he should be voted out because he. . . isn’t a good leader, in your estimation? You still haven’t provided examples of how Obama’s poor leadership has been detrimental to the country.

Why is it a logical fallacy to assume that one of the qualities of the “leader of the free world” should be actual leadership ability?

What has Obama done that is detrimental to the country?

$6 trillion in additional debt and the economy is still struggling, some fear may slip back into recession
corporations are sitting on trillions of dollars and afraid to invest it because they fear where things may be headed
Iran is on the verge of a nuclear weapon
failure to support and defend America’s constitution on several occasions
the Country’s credit rating has been downgraded
The pending tax increases and arbitrary budget cuts to take affect 01 January have the economy teatering on the edge
Certain groups around the world still hate us as much as ever (recent embassy attacks, etc.)
dangerous precedence set with types of targets and locations of drone strikes
unemployment stagnant at 8.1% (underemployed about 3 times that)
health care costs continue to rise
tuition costs continue to rise
household incomes continue to fall
his rhetoric contributes to racial division and class warfare

The list could go on for pages and pages. He is not taking effective action to solve these problems. He either ducks them, or blames someone else, or blames some other event. Furthermore, we don’t just simply elect a president with the hope that that they will “not be detrimental to the country”. We don’t elect someone so that they can remind us whose at fault for various problems. We elect them to fix the problems.

This is rich. I’ll respond to each of your bumper sticker objections, but you really need to take more classes to understand how the US government works.

Dubs - 03 October 2012 12:47 PM

What has Obama done that is detrimental to the country?

$6 trillion in additional debt and the economy is still struggling, some fear may slip back into recession

Congress holds the pursestrings, the president signs off on their bills but does not create them. You’re wrong to blame Obama here.

Dubs - 03 October 2012 12:47 PM

corporations are sitting on trillions of dollars and afraid to invest it because they fear where things may be headed

Can you be a little bit more vague? You do realize business are in the business of making money and they may do anything they want with it and the president cannot force them to spend it. You have forgotten how the businesses made their money if it was in the US. Also, if the future of business was so bad in the US it is stupid of them to sit on the cash instead of investing it where it can make a return - do you know where those great investment opportunities are? Here’s a hint - nowhere right now. Not China, not Europe, not Mexico, not Russia, not Japan. Maybe Australia, Korea, and Chile. Study up on business and investment practices, too, before shooting your mouth off.

Dubs - 03 October 2012 12:47 PM

Iran is on the verge of a nuclear weapon

They started under Bush but he did nothing, too. Why? Because it is an act of war to attack the facilities of a sovereign nation, and pre-emtive war, while Bush proved it is possible, is a bad idea. What about sanctions? Yeah, those were started under Bush, too, but they don’t work very well. So, what is your solution? And while you’re at it, explain why the president must stop Iran’s nuclear ambitions and what his powers to do so are, and how Obama failed to use his powers.

Dubs - 03 October 2012 12:47 PM

failure to support and defend America’s constitution on several occasions

How? What has the Republican controlled Congress done to bring impeachment proceedings against Obama for failing to do his job?

Dubs - 03 October 2012 12:47 PM

the Country’s credit rating has been downgraded

This is idiotic. It was downgraded as a direct result of Teabaggers in a Republican controlled Congress (remember who controls the pursestrings?) refusing to raise the debt ceiling, not because of anything Obama did.

Dubs - 03 October 2012 12:47 PM

The pending tax increases and arbitrary budget cuts to take affect 01 January have the economy teatering on the edge

Another idiotic statement since the Republicans (who control the pursestrings) presented Obama with the plan and he signed off on it, so it was a joint effort. Also, the tax increases are actually returns to tax rates set during the Republican controlled Congress and Bush years. Your fear of taxes is showing, as well as your inability to explain how taxes work.

Dubs - 03 October 2012 12:47 PM

Certain groups around the world still hate us as much as ever (recent embassy attacks, etc.)

Oh, boo hoo. Obama didn’t kiss Muslim asses and now they are mad at us. Are you sure this has nothing to do with Bush and the Republicans using the entire US military and intelligence community to wage war against them? Study history.

Dubs - 03 October 2012 12:47 PM

dangerous precedence set with types of targets and locations of drone strikes

What does this mean? What conspiracy theory has got your scared?

Dubs - 03 October 2012 12:47 PM

unemployment stagnant at 8.1% (underemployed about 3 times that)

And how is Obama supposed to fix that, and where did he fail, and why?

Dubs - 03 October 2012 12:47 PM

health care costs continue to rise

That’s because the Affordable Care Act hasn’t kicked in yet. It starts in 2014, but until then it’s still the same old system of rising costs that are pushed by the Republicans.

Dubs - 03 October 2012 12:47 PM

tuition costs continue to rise

What does Obama have to do with this?

Dubs - 03 October 2012 12:47 PM

household incomes continue to fall

What does Obama have to do with this?

Dubs - 03 October 2012 12:47 PM

his rhetoric contributes to racial division and class warfare

In your opinion.

Dubs - 03 October 2012 12:47 PM

The list could go on for pages and pages. He is not taking effective action to solve these problems. He either ducks them, or blames someone else, or blames some other event. Furthermore, we don’t just simply elect a president with the hope that that they will “not be detrimental to the country”. We don’t elect someone so that they can remind us whose at fault for various problems. We elect them to fix the problems.

Your profound misunderstanding of how our system of government works and how the office of the president works is disturbing in how it shows your authoritarian streak is writ large. This statement is exactly the sort of rhetoric would-be dictators use to convince the public to abandon democracy in favor of a strongman who can get things done without the constant bickering of a democracy. The US is a representative republic, learn what that means first.

The following courses will help you understand how the US system of government works and why:
Civics
History
Political Science
Economics
Finance
Law

By your assessment, there is no point in having a president at all, since he is not responsible for anything and can’t be expected to apply some leadership (as Bill Clinton did) to accomplish things that may be hard.

You’ve obviously had too much of the Obama kool-aid and I won’t waste more time on this thread.

By your assessment, there is no point in having a president at all, since he is not responsible for anything and can’t be expected to apply some leadership (as Bill Clinton did) to accomplish things that may be hard.

Straw man.

Dubs - 04 October 2012 04:03 AM

You’ve obviously had too much of the Obama kool-aid and I won’t waste more time on this thread.

His religious conservatism (to the extent that it is even genuine, which I doubt) and that of his running mate doesn’t really scare me, because the religious principles to which they pay lip service have essentially zero chance of becoming law. Abortions will never be outlawed, and while I disagree with the Republican stance on abortion, I don’t see it as a threat.

TheWrath, you are welcome to vote for whomever you want, obviously, and as much as I’d like these statements of yours to be true, they are in fact flat-out wrong. Bans on embryonic stem cell research BECAME LAW because of religious conviction. Gay marriage restrictions BECOME LAW because of adherence to scripture. Arbortion rights are under CONSTANT LEGAL SIEGE from religious conservatives, who draft and pass LAWS like the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 in order to relegate Roe v. Wade to a state of legislative irrelevance (i.e.: an end-around repeal). Etc., etc., etc.

I often hear statements like yours from Xtian faith-heads who, after I try to correct them, shrug, and say, “Meh, you’re just paranoid about private beliefs.” Suggest to these people that American laws allow for a Muslim to become president (something that would trouble me greatly as well, mind), and suddenly paranoia about “private” beliefs becomes a contagion.